Ethics of Fashion

[arewethereyet]

people who got too fat.

You aren't the class act you'd like to present yourself as. Poser.

[arewethereyet]

Unless you specifically purchase new from a vendor where you know the clothing is more ethical, you could still unknowingly purchase a vintage piece of clothing from a thrift store that was made in a sweat shop.

Thrifting is generally just a pretentious way of being a hipster.

I think people buying in thrift stores know that the used stuff may have been produced unethically. The point is that this damage has already been done.

If you buy something used, the damage has been done once. If you buy something new, it has been done again. The goal is to reduce the damage. 

And it's certainly not pretentious to buy used. Don't be a snob. Well-made clothes can last a very long time. Clothes from people who died or got too fat should certainly be passed on to people who can use and enjoy them. It's the garbage clothes that only last one season that do the most harm. Designer stuff, while questionably ethical up front, is often well made enough to pass through several owners -- thus giving people a chance to have nice things without increasing the load on sweatshop workers.

Just making sure this isn't edited away...Don't be a snob but call people fat.

Bwahahahaha

[John 6IX Breezy]

Can purchases not be similar, a mixed bag in which you're only signing on to responsibility for the good that results?

I think that's a good breakdown. We can imagine that even a merchant that uses the proceeds to fund a dogfighting ring, may still use some of the money to feed their children—a mixed bag like you said. This is perhaps because there isn't a 1-to-1 exchange relationship with the unethical practices. It is several causal links down the chain, and as such, may suffer from a bit of a slippery slope fallacy.


Are there legal example where a consumer was held liable for a merchant's practices? For example, purchasing stolen items, etc?

[Belacqua]

people who got too fat.  

You aren't the class act you'd like to present yourself as.  Poser.

When I realized I'd never again have a 28" waist I sold a bunch of stuff to a used clothing store. They were happy to get it. 

I got a little money, the store got stuff to sell, thin people got a bargain on some nice pants. Everybody's happy.

[John 6IX Breezy]

I think people buying in thrift stores know that the used stuff may have been produced unethically. The point is that this damage has already been done.

If you buy something used, the damage has been done once. If you buy something new, it has been done again. The goal is to reduce the damage. 

Can you expand what you mean by damage here? Initially, I thought your analogy still applied to new items—whatever bad environmental practices went into producing some jeans from Zara, were done before you made your purchase.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Can you expand what you mean by damage here? Initially, I thought your analogy still applied to new items—whatever bad environmental practices went into producing some jeans from Zara, were done before you made your purchase.

The fact you bought the Jean ensures the practice continues

[The Architect Of Fate]

I think that's a good breakdown. We can imagine that even a merchant that uses the proceeds to fund a dogfighting ring, may still use some of the money to feed their children—a mixed bag like you said. This is perhaps because there isn't a 1-to-1 exchange relationship with the unethical practices. It is several causal links down the chain, and as such, may suffer from a bit of a slippery slope fallacy.


Are there legal example where a consumer was held liable for a merchant's practices? For example, purchasing stolen items, etc?

The mere fact you are giving money to people who are making their money off unethical methods makes you a link in the chain. Whether you are held legally responsible for that doesn't change that.

[John 6IX Breezy]

The fact you bought the Jean ensures the practice continues

To the extent that this is true, do you consider waiting to buy new clothes until an end-of-season sale to be ethically superior to paying full price?

[The Architect Of Fate]

The fact you bought the Jean ensures the practice continues

To the extent that this is true, do you consider waiting to buy new clothes until an end-of-season sale to be ethically superior to paying full price?

Frankly, I don't really think it matters. After all, they didn't  lower the price out of the goodness of their hearts. Also, people have a tendency to buy more if it's on sale so they may simply make up the difference in unit purchases with volume purchases.

[Jehanne]

If you want to be environmentally friendly, whether biologically male or female, wear skirts, as they require fewer washings than do pants or shorts. I wash mine once a season; they also dry easier.